Disagree. The genetic competition between species is much too slow to compete with the cultural evolution within the human species, but since humans can control their genetics then genetic advantages can possibly interplay with a cultural advantage. Specifically I am thinking about engineering such a culture, where the men will select for genetics both for the women brought into the culture and donated sperm (not just their own).

Dyson is pointing out that the genetic interplay with culture could get much more interesting. You are playing with an outdated tool religion. Give men the capacity to understand how they can maximally compete with a multi-generational strategy that is decentralized and nearly invisible (impossible to detect and defeat).

I am competitive. I want to compete. Especially against the socialists. What always disappointed me about the prospect of offspring is they were making me less competitive and not more so. I think there may be a solution. But it is complex and I am old. So I may punt. Yet I am open sourcing the ideas.


If cultures blur and merge, then Dyson is incorrect. Instead we should see a proliferation of competition between cultures now. Technology now enables cultures to compete in different ways which weren't possible in the past.


For that to be true, competition must also die, which is impossible.

Testosterone is associated with risk taking, wider distribution of IQ, strategy+sacrifice instead of complacency, etc..


You've got that backwards. Your philosophy of bringing everything into an equality and fairness total ordering that is a static which allows friction to not exist (thus your desire can never exist unless we no longer exist, as the future and past would need to collapse into undifferentiated). Inequality and partial orders (competition in a free market) are necessary to have a differentiated past and future, i.e. the irreversibility of thermodynamics.